D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11654
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

4 (harsh?) Rejections - Screener Comment Please

Sun Nov 12, 2006 4:23 pm

Actually, I'd like any comments. I think these rejections are EXTREMELY harsh. They are harsh to the point where I have to wonder if I'm getting screener reprisals for questioning them earlier this week. Any comments are appreciated, but I would especially appreciate the screener that decided to reject ALL of my uploads this week. Here are the shots:

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...1111_n770UW_DCA_102906_DSC6713.jpg
Rejected for blemish. WTF?

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...1111_n807MD_DCA_102906_DSC6908.jpg
Rejected for oversharpened and dark.

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...1111_n823MD_DCA_102906_DSC6924.jpg
Rejected for Quality. I *really* would like to know what's wrong with the quality of this one.

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...11_N912DL_DCA_102906_DSC6683_2.jpg
Soft. Really?

Thanks,

Damon
 
User avatar
ThierryD
Crew
Posts: 2029
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:58 pm

RE: 4 (harsh?) Rejections - Screener Comment Please

Sun Nov 12, 2006 4:51 pm

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...1111_n770UW_DCA_102906_DSC6713.jpg
Rejected for blemish. WTF?

Didn't know there was a NOA-blemish rejection. Magnificent background but the plane looks a little dark; maybe some shadow highlighting could save it?

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...1111_n807MD_DCA_102906_DSC6908.jpg
Rejected for oversharpened and dark.

Dark  checkmark , oversharpened: slightly (--> jaggies on tail and winglets); will be hard to save especially with the fence in front (motive!)

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...1111_n823MD_DCA_102906_DSC6924.jpg
Rejected for Quality. I *really* would like to know what's wrong with the quality of this one.

It's dark again and the plane looks somewhat washed out (did you use a grain reduction tool?)

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...11_N912DL_DCA_102906_DSC6683_2.jpg
Soft. Really?

Yep, slightly soft (especially the tail section)

I guess N°1 + 4 could be saved with some good editing.

Good luck,

Thierry
"Go ahead...make my day"
 
Psych
Posts: 2944
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:17 am

RE: 4 (harsh?) Rejections - Screener Comment Please

Sun Nov 12, 2006 5:32 pm

Hi Damon.

I think we have here some good examples of the very high standards that are required of us all now to get photos accepted on the site.

#1 - I don't see any obvious dirt, other than something in the dark grey cloud above the crane on the right. But that could well be a legitimate cloud-related thing. However, I would say that the aircraft itself could be slightly sharper - e.g. the No.1 (left as we look) engine area and the nose/flightdeck.

#2 - unfortunately this kind of lighting does generally risk a dark rejection. No surprise to me. I think the oversharpening comes from some jaggies in areas such as the leading edge of the tailplane and the horizontal stabiliser.

#3 - Some nice lighting effects on the fuselage here, though I would agree that there are some artifacts in the photo. Take a look at the No.1 engine again - the cowling looks undersharpened and grainy. The lower fuselage doesn't look quite 'right'.

#4 - I think this is correct. If you look at the empennage/tail area that does look soft and a critical eye will be drawn there.

It is very frustrating when rejections flow, and sometimes very hard not to take things personally. I hope this feedback is of some use to you. If you would like an alternate attempt with an edit feel free to get in touch.

All the best.

Paul
 
INNflight
Posts: 3526
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:11 am

RE: 4 (harsh?) Rejections - Screener Comment Please

Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:14 pm

Number one is beautiful and an absolutely harsh example of a rejection... weird.

I can see why the other three have been rejected though.

Good luck Damon,
Flo
Jet Visuals
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: 4 (harsh?) Rejections - Screener Comment Please

Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:18 pm

Why is the first harsh if there's a dustspot left of that church.

The others are marginal in terms of quality and they are dark.

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
beechcraft
Posts: 731
Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2003 2:10 am

RE: 4 (harsh?) Rejections - Screener Comment Please

Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:28 pm

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
They are harsh to the point where I have to wonder if I'm getting screener reprisals for questioning them earlier this week

No, we don´t work that way.

cheers,

Denis
That's it! You people have stood in my way long enough. I'm going to clown college!
 
dendrobatid
Posts: 1645
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:40 pm

RE: 4 (harsh?) Rejections - Screener Comment Please

Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:52 pm

Quoting INNflight (Reply 3):
Number one is beautiful and an absolutely harsh example of a rejection... weird.

Florian
Totally disagree about the harsh rejection. At a glance it is a nice image but closer insepction shows it to be soft too.
Look at the Capitol Building in the background and you will see that it is bitingly sharp. Now look at the front of the aircraft, the nosewheel and as Psych pointed out, particularly the left side of the photo. All are soft to very soft.
Capitol building sharp, aircraft not....depth of field problems, which should not be a surprise to any experienced photographer.
A perfectly valid rejection as are the others!

Mick Bajcar
 
viv
Posts: 2953
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 5:17 pm

RE: 4 (harsh?) Rejections - Screener Comment Please

Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:56 pm

As others have said, all of the shots have defects.

Relax (the screeners are not out to get you) - and better luck with the next batch. Be careful about exposure and depth of field.
Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
 
eadster
Posts: 2125
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 7:31 pm

RE: 4 (harsh?) Rejections - Screener Comment Please

Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:12 pm

Somethings that I noticed on a very quick glance are...

The MD's rear third is very blurry.

The "objects" near the church don't look like dust but more like something in the sky. Seeing that they are causing issues, just clone them out. Easy fixed.

Rework second shot. Check histogram before uploading that one. Doing that and a little less sharpening and it could be a winner.

The second US Embraer, I have to agree. The left engine (looking at the shot) is soft, grainy and looks like its been too edited. There are parts of the aircraft which seem grainy when really shouldn't be. The quality is evident in the cheat lines. They are grainy also and just not sharp. I'd check colour levels on this too, as I'm seen a colour cast.

I may be guessing here but a few of these have evidence of a very wide f-stop/high shutter speed being used, causing some parts to be very blurry. Work with different settings and check results. You'll soon see what works and what doesn't.
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10889
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: 4 (harsh?) Rejections - Screener Comment Please

Sun Nov 12, 2006 9:49 pm

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
Rejected for blemish. WTF?

Yep big dust spot. Could be my eyes but looks like it could use a little CCW rotation too. Look's like it leaning ever so slightly.

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
Rejected for oversharpened and dark

Jaggies up the tail and dark, yep. The rest are dark and the last one is soft. Looks like a great spot to shoot from but next time shoot with better light.

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
They are harsh to the point where I have to wonder if I'm getting screener reprisals for questioning them earlier this week

Yep! Probably.   

[Edited 2006-11-12 13:56:58]
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
flyfisher1976
Posts: 777
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:08 pm

RE: 4 (harsh?) Rejections - Screener Comment Please

Sun Nov 12, 2006 10:05 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 9):
Yep big dust spot

  

LH side mid-way up next to green tower.

The rest seem dark.

[Edited 2006-11-12 14:06:54]
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11654
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: 4 (harsh?) Rejections - Screener Comment Please

Sun Nov 12, 2006 11:57 pm

Everyone,

I greatly appreciate the comments! Thank you. I'd respond to every great comment, but you guys wouldn't want to read them all.  Smile Please don't feel snubbed.

Quoting ThierryD (Reply 1):
It's dark again and the plane looks somewhat washed out (did you use a grain reduction tool?)

I used CS2's noise reduction tool on the solid surfaces of the lower fuselage, but not on any color edges. Is this not okay?

Quoting Psych (Reply 2):
#2 - unfortunately this kind of lighting does generally risk a dark rejection.

That's unfortunate. Non-blue sky days are often the most visually interesting.

Quoting Psych (Reply 2):
The lower fuselage doesn't look quite 'right'.

Is this better?

Quoting Timdegroot (Reply 4):
Why is the first harsh if there's a dustspot left of that church.

Thanks, Tim. I looked at that many times, and assumed it was a steam plume from one of the buildings over there that I often see because I didn't see that spot on any of the other shots. I had to ramp up the contrast on a shot I didn't upload before I could find it. I'll reupload it with that fixed.

Quoting Beechcraft (Reply 5):
No, we don´t work that way.

I sure hope you're right, because I feel like from some screener responses (or lack of responses) that I've somehow pissed some of you off.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 9):
Looks like a great spot to shoot from but next time shoot with better light.

This spot only really works when there is very windy weather. National hardly ever uses the cross runways for jets, and this spot is not good for RWY1-19.

Quoting Viv (Reply 7):
better luck with the next batch. Be careful about exposure and depth of field.

Will do, but for the record, I shot all of these at f/6.3, 7.1, and 8 only. If the Capitol is sharp, it's because I sharpened it. I wanted to make sure that it was accented in the background.

Another re-edit.

Again, thanks all for the comments!
 
Psych
Posts: 2944
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:17 am

RE: 4 (harsh?) Rejections - Screener Comment Please

Mon Nov 13, 2006 12:33 am

Hello again Damon.

Just on those two new edits:

#1 - I am afraid that I would have to say it is still not there. But I do like the reflections. Seems like a sharpening issue is going on here - was the original cropped a lot? What sharpening settings are you using?

# 2 - Now with this one I think you have gone too far the other way. This one is too light and so lacks the appropriate contrast. In between the two will be better - though that fence is somewhat obtrusive, but those are a subjective call.

All the best.

Paul
 
TransIsland
Posts: 1826
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 9:22 pm

RE: 4 (harsh?) Rejections - Screener Comment Please

Mon Nov 13, 2006 12:40 am

#2 - With that fence, I reckon you're lucky they didn't throw in "motive," too. I agree with oversharpened and dark, might be fixable, but watch the sky.

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
I *really* would like to know what's wrong with the quality of this one.

dark, heat haze & grain, as well as a small halo around the horizontal and vertical stabilisers.

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
Soft. Really?

Yes.
I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests